I think the errata in question is hinted at in
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2004JanMar/0060.html
but it would be nice to write up a summary of how
the spec should actually change, so that we can judge
'consensus' on the proposed text.
Note that Scott Lawrence maintains a HTTP errata page
at http://purl.org/NET/http-errata
> AFAIK, IETF does not have a formal mechanism for submitting errata.
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata.html says
To report suspected errors that are more technical
in nature, please verify the errors with the authors
and/or appropriate area directors of the IESG before
sending them to the RFC Editor for posting.
In this case, though, we got the RFC editor to point to
Scott's page.
Jim Gettys claims that
draft-gettys-http-v11-spec-rev-00.txt
already includes all of the existing errata, so, once
there is clear agreement, the change could also be
incorporated.
Larry
--
http://larry.masinter.net